Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 17:12:34 -0500 (EST) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ep0 incorrectly probed Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001271709480.462-100000@sasami.jurai.net> In-Reply-To: <20000127210436.15CE61CD4@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, Peter Wemm wrote: > For example: > Logical device #0 > IO: 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 > IRQ 5 0 > DMA 1 0 > IO range check 0x00 activate 0x01 > > versus: > pcm0: <CS423x> at port 0x534-0x537,0x388-0x38b,0x220-0x22f irq 5 drq 1,0 on isa0 > > Which is right? Does the device really have all 8 IO ranges assigned to > the same address? (0x534) Or is pnpinfo wrong? I dunno. Looks like pnpinfo is wrong when it comes to printing IO address ranges assigned. I do know that somehow or another the kernel PnP stuff isn't able to tell the card to use the assigned addresses but I don't get any failure messages (from the PnP code.) If you've got an Intel Etherexpress Pro/10 board you should be able to observe this. -- | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | | winter@jurai.net | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0001271709480.462-100000>